Hurricane Patricia kindly requests that all climate change deniers shut up now and forever after.

They're not listening. They think climate change acknowledgment will lead to the end of our manufacturing economy. (Newsflash...that fight is over.)

Ha. Just wait until the rest of this year's El Niño really sets in, and mucks up all the heavy-duty wind/water high-speed storms patterns.

Request denied.

And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

Alrighty then...

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

And I hope you understand that those scientists have already concluded that global warming is in fact to blame for the increased severity of storms in general.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

What part of the economy? Certainly not the solar- and wind-generation industries. By some accounts, there are as many Americans working in the solar power industry right now as are working in the coal industry.

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

Of course. It will NEVER be possible to blame a single event on global warming. Not possible.

But when all of sudden you enter a period of time, as we have done, where extraordinary weather events become commonplace, the odds are that the pattern of extreme weather is caused by warming.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

And with all due respect, it's you guys that are the chicken littles, since you treat any acknowledgement that something should be done about warming as the end of capitalism.

heh, as if that would be a bad thing.

The problem will differ through the decades. The solutions will always be the same

drummerboy said:

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

Of course. It will NEVER be possible to blame a single event on global warming. Not possible.
But when all of sudden you enter a period of time, as we have done, where extraordinary weather events become commonplace, the odds are that the pattern of extreme weather is caused by warming.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

And with all due respect, it's you guys that are the chicken littles, since you treat any acknowledgement that something should be done about warming as the end of capitalism.
heh, as if that would be a bad thing. ">

You do science a disservice when you talk about Hurricane Patricia in the context of global warming.

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

Of course. It will NEVER be possible to blame a single event on global warming. Not possible.
But when all of sudden you enter a period of time, as we have done, where extraordinary weather events become commonplace, the odds are that the pattern of extreme weather is caused by warming.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

And with all due respect, it's you guys that are the chicken littles, since you treat any acknowledgement that something should be done about warming as the end of capitalism.
heh, as if that would be a bad thing. ">

You do science a disservice when you talk about Hurricane Patricia in the context of global warming.

And why is that? Especially since you just said "there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events." Scientists, by your own admission, try to figure out if and how storms are being affected by global warming.

drummerboy said:

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

Of course. It will NEVER be possible to blame a single event on global warming. Not possible.
But when all of sudden you enter a period of time, as we have done, where extraordinary weather events become commonplace, the odds are that the pattern of extreme weather is caused by warming.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

And with all due respect, it's you guys that are the chicken littles, since you treat any acknowledgement that something should be done about warming as the end of capitalism.
heh, as if that would be a bad thing. ">

You do science a disservice when you talk about Hurricane Patricia in the context of global warming.

And why is that? Especially since you just said "there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events." Scientists, by your own admission, try to figure out if and how storms are being affected by global warming.

Because one storm isn't a sign of anything from a scientific perspective. Same as if we happen to have a perfectly "normal" winter this year...not a sign of anything.

I suppose that politically, it may take a catastrophic hurricane hitting Florida to a lot of deniers to modify their position on how to respond to climate change even though the events that are of concern are things like rising average temperatures and shrinking ice cover in the Artic.

tjohn said:
I suppose that politically, it may take a catastrophic hurricane hitting Florida to a lot of deniers to modify their position on how to respond to climate change even though the events that are of concern are things like rising average temperatures and shrinking ice cover in the Artic.

I don't think any event is going to change real climate change deniers' minds. I think rational people like some here, who are not certain, might be convinced over time. But for quite a few, the entirety of Florida could get washed away and they will find some other rationale.

Media hype. Which is what is our real issue:

But in fact no big deal:

"Mexico had been braced for the worst when meteorologists dubbed Patricia the most powerful storm ever recorded in the Western Hemisphere. Thousands of tourists and residents were evacuated from coastal resort communities in the states of Colima, Jalisco and Nayarit as Patricia churned toward them.

But minimal damage was reported in those cities early Saturday where Patricia had made landfall."

http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-mexico-hurricane-patricia-20151024-story.html

The science is conclusive: global sea temp are rising and warmer waters cause more frequent and more potent hurricanes and cyclones.

mbaldwin said:

drummerboy said:

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:
I mean, what will it take to convince you people?

Of course you do understand that a single weather event does not tell us anything about global warming and that there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events.

Of course. It will NEVER be possible to blame a single event on global warming. Not possible.
But when all of sudden you enter a period of time, as we have done, where extraordinary weather events become commonplace, the odds are that the pattern of extreme weather is caused by warming.

Red_Barchetta said:
Request denied.


And with all due respect, all liberal chicken littles who have no qualms about destroying the economy can go F themselves.

And with all due respect, it's you guys that are the chicken littles, since you treat any acknowledgement that something should be done about warming as the end of capitalism.
heh, as if that would be a bad thing. ">

You do science a disservice when you talk about Hurricane Patricia in the context of global warming.

And why is that? Especially since you just said "there is a whole body of science trying to figure out how much global warming might be to blame for particular weather events." Scientists, by your own admission, try to figure out if and how storms are being affected by global warming.

Because one storm isn't a sign of anything from a scientific perspective. Same as if we happen to have a perfectly "normal" winter this year...not a sign of anything.

I think that I've been pretty clear that this isn't about one storm. It's about the latest in a long and probably unprecedented period of extraordinary storms.

bramzzoinks said:
Media hype. Which is what is our real issue:
But in fact no big deal:
"Mexico had been braced for the worst when meteorologists dubbed Patricia the most powerful storm ever recorded in the Western Hemisphere. Thousands of tourists and residents were evacuated from coastal resort communities in the states of Colima, Jalisco and Nayarit as Patricia churned toward them.

But minimal damage was reported in those cities early Saturday where Patricia had made landfall."
http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-mexico-hurricane-patricia-20151024-story.html

It was no big deal because the storm quickly weakened. But the fact that it was the strongest hurricane ever recorded I think is a bit of a big deal. Again, coupled with all of the other super-strong storms we've experienced in the last few years.

Like all those huge east coast storms since Sandy. Wait, never mind. It has been an unusually quiet period.

South Carolina got over a foot of rain in one day from a tropical storm just a few weeks ago.

And then you add your continental experience to what's happening around the rest of the Pacific, the Indian and Atlantic oceans and the science is quite conclusive.

The hottest years were recorded last year and this year. The years with greatest extremes in temperatures, as regular events not as 'one off' events, sequentially over the last three years (I'm writing from memory, I think it's three years, could be 5). The years with greatest number/greater 'power' of storms, either summer or winter, recorded over the last decade (so both frequency and ferocity are increasing).

Further, the total increase in global temperatures has gone above the 'oh, we're not really sure' mark and was officially recognised a couple of months ago even by our climate-change denying federal government as attributable to human development. Not that they're doing much about it; officially they still spruik coal for curing poverty and hunger.

The point is: whether you want to believe it or not, the age of frequent fierce extreme storms, summer or winter, is here. The age of unseasonal blazing heat and freezing cold, beyond the usual calendar dates marking the Seasons, is here. The age of not enough water, then suddenly too much to be useful, is here. It doesn't matter what label you want to put on it: everyone's 'economy' now depends on how quickly we rebuild, rehome and recover not on how we pretend this is unusual.

tom said:
South Carolina got over a foot of rain in one day from a tropical storm just a few weeks ago.

It wasn't from a tropical storm. It was a normal front that happened to stall.

bramzzoinks said:

tom said:
South Carolina got over a foot of rain in one day from a tropical storm just a few weeks ago.

It wasn't from a tropical storm. It was a normal front that happened to stall.

Yeah, and besides, all that cleaning up and fixing business will spur the economy.

I believe that thinking "deniers" aren't really deniers. Their concerns are the economy, the seeming futility of attempts at correction (which will never manifest in their lifetimes), the expectation of no cooperation from others, the tree-hugging liberal crowd, etc.

Further, any imminent major changes will affect the third world rather than us. We'll be fine. We'll adapt. Fcuk the future.

Apparently, the fact that the military and int'l corporations are planning for the changes is irrelevant.

bramzzoinks said:

tom said:
South Carolina got over a foot of rain in one day from a tropical storm just a few weeks ago.

It wasn't from a tropical storm. It was a normal front that happened to stall.

http://www.dogonews.com/2015/10/12/how-hurricane-joaquin-contributed-to-south-carolinas-historic-rainfall-without-making-landfall

Not a normal front that just happened to stall.

It is hard to deny temperature records that the world has been getting warmer, on average, from year to year. A more sensible debate would be about the extent to which it is caused by man-made by-products. While no doubt this is part of the problem, the world has gone through dramatic periods of warming and cooling cycles before there was ever an industrial revolution, and it seems difficult to determine, for example, whether an independent warming cycle is occurring separately or in conjunction with the release of carbon into the atmosphere, and how much each factor contributes the total.

GL2 said:
I believe that thinking "deniers" aren't really deniers. Their concerns are the economy, the seeming futility of attempts at correction (which will never manifest in their lifetimes), the expectation of no cooperation from others, the tree-hugging liberal crowd, etc.
Further, any imminent major changes will affect the third world rather than us. We'll be fine. We'll adapt. Fcuk the future.

If anyone believes we have an immigration problem now, just wait until this happens. People will have to go somewhere.

I'm a lefty environmentalist who believes we should do everything prudent to guard against human caused warming.

But in my heart of hearts, I don't know that I'm a "believer". The planet has undergone too many changes over the millennia for me to think that static is normal. Ice ages, magnetic polar shifts, deserts once oceans, etc. Sure the climate is changing, but bigger changes occurred long before humans stopped dragging their knuckles.

The reason "progressives" love this issue is that any solution will involve intervention. The problem is that if the US were to go to 0 carbon emissions the effect would be a slow of temperature increase of 0.052°C by 2050 and 0.137°C by 2100.0.052°C by 2050 and 0.137°C by 2100.